There no term that means so different things to so many tennis players as "pushing " or "pusher".
Is in order to even confuse or narrow down this term. What is the exact opposite of "pushing" or "pusher " to you and why?
How about "puller" or "pulling"? Nah
I like "smashing" or " smasher"

True pushers almost never hit winners. They earn all their points by bumping the ball back into play and watching the opponent make an error.

So the opposite of a pusher is a player who hits a lot of winners. In the past, I'd say that S&V is the most opposite of pushing. S&V players end up getting passed or hitting winning volleys. In the modern game, a player who hits hard to get winners is the opposite of a pusher, even if they stay at the baseline.

Interesting that overhitting is considering a good answer. Then what about Just plain hitting? Is there such thing as underhitting? or is that the same as pushing ? How about overpushing or under pushing ?

Interesting that overhitting is considering a good answer. Then what about Just plain hitting? Is there such thing as underhitting? or is that the same as pushing? How about overpushing or under pushing?

I agree. There seems to be an assumption that pushers always win. I've beaten pushers by hitting approaches and then winners.

Attacking tennis is the opposite of pushing, and attacking players beat pushers every day (admittedly, some also lose).

Pushing, as far as the term makes sense, has to be an overall attitude toward game play. People tend to given visual cues of reality when trying to innovate in matters of words, so my best guess would be that pushing qualified, initially the player's striking action. Pushing instead of striking... That would be doing the bare minimum to keep the ball alive, purposefully avoiding to hit hard, or even limiting oneself to bunting the ball back if it is possible.

In many discussions on the net and on courts, I have pictured pushing as an under-optimal playing strategy: that is, it's the defensive counterpart of ball bashing. Ideally, you do not err below, nor higher than necessary: objectively, risks can be rewarding when managed properly and exaggerations can hurt. Either way, it's a mistake because the response must always be adapted to the circumstance.

So, who's not a "pusher," but the exact opposite? People highlighted it properly here: a ball basher, someone who constantly tries to impose his presence with force and power, who tries to hit winners every two shots... that's a ball basher and that's the exact opposite mistake.

So, who's not a "pusher," but the exact opposite? People highlighted it properly here: a ball basher, someone who constantly tries to impose his presence with force and power, who tries to hit winners every two shots... that's a ball basher and that's the exact opposite mistake.

I think this is correct. The most extreme opposite of a pusher would be a person who tries to hit a winner on every shot. As that's not a very practical strategy, I think the most common opposite is someone who tries to win by hitting pace or someone who attacks the net in order take away time and hit winners.